| Summary: | The bill was filed by an executor of Yaney Holman to get advice on his will. The Supreme Court ruled on a variety of matters which were raised. The slaves given to Thornton and Archer in the will were deemed to be merely confirmation of previous parol gifts. The mistake in the will listing the slaves the wrong way round was set aside and it was deemed to be the testator's intention to dispose of the slaves as per the parol gifts. Archer had taken the slaves given to him to Mississippi and sold them there. Archer's death occurred before the death of the testator and the bequest to him just satisfied the previous gift. Mrs Carter did not take a life-estate in the slave Nancy, the child of Mary. She was born after the writing of the will, but before the death of the testator. Difference between existing increase at the time the will was written and future increase. Mary did not pass with her mother. The hires from the slaves to be hired out for the benefit of the children of the testator's daughter, Elizabeth Russell, were to be remitted to the appropriate Court of Probate in Lauderdale county, Alabama, the county in which they lived, and not to the County Court as there were no such courts in Alabama. The proceeds from the personal property sold for [dollars] 805, and from the sale of Harriet and her child Cina, who were sold as directed by the will for [dollars] 1,000, were to be distributed equally amongst the bodily heirs of my three daughters, Elizabeth Russell, Sarah Carter and Catharine King. This clause did not include the bonds, notes and open accounts and money on hand at the time of the testator's death. These were to be distributed as per the statute of distributions. Provisions for sale and hire of slaves and land. The children of the three daughters took their shares per stirpes and not per capita. The executor could distribute to these children without delay and did not need to wait until the death of their mothers. The executor was also given directions as to his assent to the legacies. Where there were outstanding debts and trusts to be dealt with, he had to give a special rather than a general assent, and he had to insist upon an inventory of the property, and take a bond with sureties, to ensure that the value of a life-estate was delivered when it became due.
|
|---|